LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

iiiii It: nil till' iiriii'llill till IWM 



011 896 345 3 



ADDRESS 



TO THE PEOPIiE 



OF THE 



COJ^'QRJESSIOJV^X, mSTRICT 



off 



CHARLESTON. 



- — ^ 



B? The Hon. aVILLI AM ' DRAYTON. 




CHARLESTON, S. C. 
PRINTED AT THE Charleston press, by wM. ESTlLt. 

im 



E-S^^ 



'A 



■ T)'n 



ADDRESa 



Fellow-Citizens. — In consecpience of the near approach of the 
period when the payment of the public debt was anticipated, it v. as 
naturally expected and desired that the late Congress, before itaad- 
joiirnment, would revise and so modify the Tariff' act of 1828, as to 
reduce, considerably, the amount of the revenue which it provided 
for, and also the rate of the duties which were levied under it, upon 
the importation of protected articles. As early as January, 1832, 
two resolutions of the House of Representatives directed the Secre- 
tary of the Treasury "to collect information as to certain iiianufac- 
tin-es in the United States, and to conuiiunicate the same to the 
House, with such suggestions as he might think useful, with a 
view to the adjustment of the tariff, and with such a tariff of duties 
on imports, as might, in his opinion, be best adapted to the advance- 
ment of the public interest." In the report made by the Secretary of 
the Treasury in compliance with these resolutions, he remarked 
that the impost system " of the United States has been for many 
years, incidentally, but so intimately connected with the growth 
and protection of American capital and labour, as to have raised 
up a great national interest indispensable to the prosperity of the 
country and which cannot be lost sight of, in any new adjustment 
of the system. In the circumstances which require, at present, a 
general reduction of the revenue, it is not deemed practicable to 
pursue, for any length of time, the degree of protection hitherto 
aflffjrded to those interests which have grown up under the pasfe 
legislation. The state of public feeling throughout an important 
portion of the country, which, with greater or less intensity, calls 
for a revision of the existing tariff, is not to be disguised. Both 
patriotism and wisdom dictate that this sentiment should be respected 
and as far as may be compatible with the common weal, that it 
be satisfied, not from any unworthy motive, but under that obligation 
of duty which requires that all be regarded with an equal eye; that 
all be borne upon with an equal hand ; and under that no less so- 
lemn obligation, to preserve by any reasonable concessions, our 
inestimable Union." In the spirit of these sentiments, which re- 
dound so much to the credit of the head and the heart of the Sec- 



i*(aiy, he prt?pareJ a bill for Congi'ess, which, wiih s6me ahemtionr?^ 
would ill my iudgnieut, have been peculiarly adapted to meet the 
exig-eiicies of the times. This bill was referred to the committee 
on Manufactures of the House of Representative*, who professed 
to make it the basis of a bill reported by them, which, after having 
received various amendments, became a law on the 14th of July 
1832. 

For the vote whicli was given by me upon the final passage of 
tills bill, all the newspapers ihroughout the Slate, which are attach- 
ed to tjie doctrine of Nullification, have charged me with having 
sacriticed the interests of my const iluents, and with having acted 
iiiconsistently with opinions which I had pieviously expressed. 
Anxious that my fellow-cifizens, whether they be my pjliiical 
fi lends or foes, should be in possession of the motives of my political 
co^iduct, in order that they may be enabled to determine whelher 
I merit their confidence, or have justly exposed myself to their 
censure, I will submit to them the reasons that governed me upon 
the subject under consideration. 

The provisions of the tariff act of 1832, arc, by no means, such 
as I desired them to have been; but when they were under discus- 
sion, before Congress, the p:oi>lem for the solution of the mcmljers 
of that Body, was not, in ordinary circumstances, what a Tariff 
act ought to be, nor in Avhat manner it should be drawn, so a»to 
satisfy the manufactures of the North, or the agriculturists of the 
South — the exclusive friends of protection, on the one hand, or of 
free trade on the other; — but whether any middle course could be 
devised, which would reconcile conflicting prejudices and interests 
— allay the fury raging in the bosoms of the two great Tai'iffiwr- 
ties into which the people were divided, and prevent that collision 
between them, which might, not only, disturb the harmony but en- 
danger the existence of the Union. 

The difficulty of effecting this arrangement, was, probably, 
grv^atcr than any which had ever been preseuted to the deliberations 
of Congress, since the adoption of the Federal Constitution. While 
a large minority of the people regard a protective tariff to be un- 
authorized by the Constitution, a majority of them have arrived 
at a diametrically opposite conclusion. If all those who were hos- 
tile (o a protective tariff, pronounced it to be unconstitutional, and 
all those who were in fovor of it, pronounced it to be consthutionaJ, 
it might, naturalhv, be presumed that these discordant infeienceg 
-lesulted from sectional prejudices or individual interests. But such 
is not the relative position of the contending parties. The advo- 
cates of protection are uimiimous, on their side of 'he question, 
whereas its adversaries differ among themselves. Many of J he 
most intelligent delegates of the Free Trade Convention whict met 
in Phil;tdelphia in September last, expressed their conviction ol the 
Icgitiniaie power of Congress- to pass protective tariff acts^, though 



^. 



iJ)cy coiuleinu their priucip'C, as fionolit with evil niid iiijastioc: ond 
(lie siiine opinions were a\o\ved by Mr. Gaikilin, tlie avillior of a nie- 
luorial from that Conventioji in wliicli the iiijinious consequences 
of Icgir-jlative int4?iference with tlie capilal and labor of individu- 
als, arc demonsi rated with an ability and clearjiess, which have not. 
been equalled by any production which has issued from (he Ameri- 
can press. The majorify of the people noL only think ihai protective 
duties are constituiional, but they are as confident that they are es- 
sential to the advanceinenl of (be general weal; and in support of their 
views, (hey rely upon the numerous protective Tariff acts Avhich 
Jiave been passed, and upon the approbation of them by every Pres- 
ident of tJie Uiiited States. The minority are as thoroughly con- 
vinced, that a Protective Tariff impairs the prosjierty of the great 
iriass of the co)nmunity, and subjects them to a heavy taxation for 
the benefit of the, comparatively, few. When the people thus 
differ upon a subject, in which tiieir interests are deeply involved — 
when tliose interests are believed to be fostered or depressed, by 
legislation, according to geographical positions, it nuist be obvious, 
that Congress could pass no act so modifying piotection as to give 
complete and gene! al satisfaction. Theonly course, tliereibre, which 
the late Congress could adopt to cairn the public excitement, and 
to arrest the perilous march of deep and bitter discojitent, was to 
propose a law upon the basis of nuitual concession and comprom- 
ise. Upon this basis (he act of July, 1832, was founded, l.)y which 
(he condilions of concession and comptomise were understood to 
be, that (he ad\ocates of restriction should consent to a co)isidera- 
ble reduction in th<3 rate of protective duties and in the pmount of 
le^enueto be collected from iinports and that some changes should be 
mi;de in those parts of the sj^stem where its pressures was peculiaily 
obnoxious. The ultra-res! nctionists, ajid the partizans of Nullilica- 
tion did not subscribe to these terms, the former being a^'erse to 
any diminution of the protective duties — the latter repudiating 
everjr species of compromise wliich did not include the abandon- 
nient of the principle of protection. These ultraists, however, 
were a minority. The majorily acquiesed in the compro)nise 
Avhicli has been mentioned: but where the real or the supposed in- 
terests of the parties were sp variant, it was vain to expect, that 
any compromise could be so executed as to be exempt from mutual 
objectiojis. An -approximation towards that which each of them 
desired was as much as could have been, reasonably, calculated 
upon, in the passage of the first Tariff act which has been intro- 
duced, during so many years, with the declared intention of redu» 
cing the rates of protection. That approximation, it seemed to me, 
was effected by the act of 1833, inasmuch as by it the minimums 
upon woollens were repealed, and the aggregate of the levenue 
and the amount of the protecting duties considera}jly diminished. 



e 

Bein3f satisfied, that, this act was, incomparatively, better than that 
of 1828, I accordingly voted for it. Upon what ground, I can, even 
plausibly, be cha'ged with impoHcy or inconsistency, for thus vo- 
ting I am unable to discover. It is true that I have, ahvays, ex- 
p essed myself adverse to the constitutionality and the expediency 
of a protective tariff; but wiiatever may be my opinion and the 
opinions of the larger portion of the citizens of the South, I am com- 
pelled to admit, that the constitutionality of a protective tariff", is 
lut oaly a debateable question, upon which wise and honest men 
may and do disagree, but that the weight of numbers and of 
great names preponderates in favor of those who maintain its con- 
stitutional ity. Under these circumstances, when I reflected, that 
the act of 1832 diminished the existing duties, repealed the mini- 
mums upon woollens, (among the most odious devices of a most 
odious law,) and lightened, generally, the burthen of taxation, I felt 
myself not merely justified, but imperiously required to facilitate its 
passage, by evei y means in my power. Had I supported a bill which 
augmented the protective duties, w^hich extended the deceptive 
mimmums, and which added to the puWic burthens, the impolicy 
and the inconsisfency of my conduct might well have been noticed, 
as meriting the severest animadversion. 

It has afso been alleged against me, that I gave my sanction to 
a law which recograzed "the protective system as the settled policy 
o^" the country." Ujx)n what authority "this allegation is made, I 
am ignorant. It is not sustained by any Avords which I have uttered, 
or by any language in the context of the law, or by any inference 
to be drawn from either. If it is to be inferred from the fact, that 
the restrictionists, in the compromise w^iich they declared them- 
selves willing to enter into, did not agree to abandon protection, 
which they claimed as a right, it is admitted that they did not. 
Nothing is more certain, than that no law would have been passed, 
had this abandonment Ix^en demanded as one of its conditions. The 
basis upon which the law was professed to be founded, was that of 
mutual compromise and concession. Now where one side surren- 
df^ts the very groimd which is in dispute, there may be victory or 
defeat, but mutual compromise and concession are terms utterly 
mapplicable to such a position of the parties. If by the allegation, 
the meaning is intended to be conveyed, that Messrs. Blair, and 
Mitchell, and myself, who voted for the act of 1832, in any mode 
or 'nanner, recognized "the protective system as the settled policy 
of the country" it would be suflficient to deny the imputation and 
to ask for the proof. But neither the conduct of those of my col- 
leagues whom I have named, nor of myself, is susceptible of an 
ambiguous interpretation. Upon the floor of the House of Repre- 
sentatives, I repea.'ed what I had often stated, both there and 
esewhere, 'hat, in my opinion, a protective Tariff, was unconsti- 
tutional, unequal and oppressive; I call upon tlie friends of Free 



Trade — not to acknowledge the constitutionality or the policy of 
a protective Tarill^ — not to yield any principle or to sacritice any 
interest — but to forbear from insisting upon the sudden abandon- 
incnt of a system, which would be attended with the ruin of mil- 
lions — to endeavour to obtain aiLamelioration of its provisions, by 
conspromise with their opponents, and to postpone all eflorls for its 
repeal, to a future and more auspicious peiiod. Gei^eral Blair, so 
far from conceiving that his vote was a recognition "ofthesetT 
tied policy of the protected system," decla-ed, that he "did not 
vote for the bill as a compromise of the subject, or as a quietus of 
the complaints of the QoKith, but on the principle of reduction;" ixnd 
Mr. Mitchell, who spoke at length against the bill, gave to it his 
support, foi reasons simular to those which had been assigned by 
General Blair, Had my conduct in relation to this bill been the 
reverse of what it was, had I voted against it, and had this vote 
been cited, to establish that I had been inconsistent, and treacher- 
ous to my duty, I should have felt that I was incompetent to de- 
fend myself against these grave accusations. I might have urged, 
as a subterfuge, that I would not sutler my name to be enrolled in 
favor of any protective Tariff; but would I not have been confound-? 
ed and silenced by the reply, tliat if the law which I refused to 
vote for, had been rejected, a law more grevious, and which con- 
tained protective duties more onerous, would be in force; and that 
by declining to exert myself to accomplish the passage of the act of 
1832, I, virtually contributed to rivit upon my fellow-citizens the 
g) eater oppression of the act of 1828. The compromise which I 
recommended in the House of Representatives, was intended, and 
was declared to be intended, to meet the existing crisis, which, in 
the apprehension of many wise and patriotic men, threatened the 
destruction of the Union. To avert this deep and dire calamity, an 
immediate remedy was necessary — that remedy could not be admin- 
istered without the co-operation of the friends and the adversaries of 
protection: that co-operation, to the extent which has been nsention- 
ed, was obtained. It was unconnected with any compact, eorpress or 
implied, as to " the settled policy of the country," or as to the true con- 
struction of the powers "to lay and collect taxes," or " to regulate 
commerce." That the protective principle is contained in the act of 
1832, is undeniable : it was also contained in the bill which was re- 
ported by Mr. McDufRe, as the chairman of the Coitimittea of Ways 
and Means; for in that Bill, duties of 25 per centum ad valorem, for 
prescribed periods, were to be levied upon the protected articles of 
Ir( n. Salt, Sugar, Cotton Bagging, Woollens, &c.: afterwards the 
duty was to be, gradually, reduced to 12 1-2 per centum, ad valo- 
rem, which, under that bill was estimated to be the rate of duty which 
was necessary for revenue. The constitutionality of the protective 
system was as plainly admitted, by legislating for the continuance 



8 

of some protecied items, during a single year, a.-^ by legisjaf hig lor 
aJ 01 them, witliout any limitation as to time. Although the 
principle of protection has never been abandoned by ony Congress: 
although it is einbraced within the provisions of the Act of 1833, 
I have yet never supposed myself less at libc] ty now, ilian former- 
ly, to use all my exertions to erase it from our Sfatute-Book ; and 
I derive no little confidence in the repeal of protective Tariffs,from 
the fact, that a dimuiution of the power of th{;S(> who have, hitherto, 
been regarded to be the veteran and uncompromising supporters of 
protection, was manifcslod, by the passage of the Act ol July last, 
in spite of their mnemitting and strenuous oj)pasi(ion to it, aided by 
the co-operaticn of several of those avIio term themselves the 
iiiends of free trade, among vvlioiii v^'ere included both of oiu- Simi- 
ators and six of our Representatives. These Senotors and Repre- 
sentatives might have been able to reconcile their conduct with 
what they conceived to be policy and duty. I could not imitate 
tiieir example, nor shall I be prevailed upon to think that I ought 
to have done so, until I shall be persuaded that the bmlhen of pro- 
tective duties is increased, by radudng their rate and amount ; — and 
that where the choice is submitted to a representative of subjecting 
his constituents to a greater or a lesser evil, he ought to prefer in- 
flicting upon tliein the greater. 

Ameliorations in the existkig Tariff have been achieved by th(} 
Act of 1832. When that change shall take place in Congress, 
^hich will be produced b}- the election of new members, according 
to the Apportionment Rill of the last session, there is every reason 
to expect that still fiirther advances will l3p made, towards the ful- 
filment of what is desired by the friends pf unrestricted industry. 
In the interim, what has been done, cannot impede, but will rather 
accelerate the progress of more just and liberal legislation. Were 
I called upon to state, what I firmly believe to be the cause of the 
Tariff system which nov/ convulses our State, I should conscien-r 
tiously reply, that it is to be attributed to th« Act of the 27th of 
Apr'l, 1316, the passage of which was so strenuously advocated 
by three-fouTths of the delegation from South-Carolina, that they 
insisted upon " the necessity of affording protection to manufactures, 
to put them beyond the reach of contingency from foreign competition.^'' 
The restrictive measures of the government before the late war 
With Great Britain, and the interruption to our Cojumerce during 
that war, had virtually protected domestic manufactures ; but 
when the Act of April, 1816, was under discussion, the duties 
which were intended for protection, v»^ere generally so light, as al- 
most to have escaped observation. In April, 1816, the principle of 
protection was openly avowed, and enforced in many instances, by 
correspondent duties. Then was invented the miscliievous and de- 
lusive contrivance of the minimums, which was first applied tp 
that fabric, the raw material of which constitutes the great staple 



9' 

ttf the »c^itli. It is true, that a provision was inserted, that the 
rates of duties upon the niauufactiircs of cotton and wool ahouid 
be reduced within three years : but these were the only restrictions 
in that Act. lis protective character, in other respects, was pre- 
served. The minimum, upon Cottons, by the o[3eration of which 
those of the East Indies were driveji from our market, was to be 
retained at 20 cents instead of 25 cents, without the annexation of 
any limitation as to time. High duties uiwn other commodities 
were impo^^d, wiihout any reservation ; and among them the duty 
upon salt, winch is now 10 cents the bushel, was tixed at 20 cents, 
and the duty upon biown sugar, which, under tiie Act of 1832, 
will be 2 1-2 cents the pound, was fixed at 3 cents the pound. 
From the era of the passage of the Act of April, 1816, the trans- 
fer of capital was invited and rapidly diverted from its natural 
channels, into investments in those employments of labor which 
were stimulated by legislative protection. These investments have 
been made u}X)n t;o extensive a scale, that a withdauval of thenjr 
cannot be attempted, otherwise than slowly and gradually, vrilh-. 
out the inevdable ruin of millions of onr felloAV citizens, a large 
proportion of whom were, originally, as hostile to a protective Ta- 
rifT, as are now the inhabitants of our State, The sin or the error 
of having aided in the passage of the Act of 1816, cannot be im- 
pvited to me. I am neither responsible for that law, nor for the ca- 
lamities of which it has been the fealeful source. I have never 
given a vote upon any qtiestion, in favor of its principles. These 
principles I have always resisted, and I shall continue to resist 
tliem, by ail the means in my power, which are consistent with the 
obligations of honesty, a respect for the letter and the spirit of the 
Federal com.pact, and the preservation of the integrity of the Union. 
Since the date of my letter to a Committee of the State Rights 
and Union Party, I have received from the Register of the Tiea- 
f^ury, a " statentient exhibiting the amount of duties n,ccording to 
the present rates, compared with the duties as modified by the Act 
of 14th of July, 1832," which I have left with the Editor of 
the Southern Patriot. Upon the assumption, that the dutiable ar. 
tides will be the same in quantity and price, after the 3d of March 
next, as they were in the year 1830, this statement shows that un- 
der the Tariff Act of July, 1832, there will be a reduction of 
^1,869,056* from the amount of duties on protected articles, and 
of ^5,187,078 from the amount of revenue to be derived from the 
customs. 

* Upon the prcrtectcd articles of Moksses and Salt, there was a redncfion of the dir- 
ties l.y the Acts of 1S30, amounTin? to $956,121, which added to $1,869,056, makes tho 
whole reduction since the Act of 1828, to be $2,825,177. 

The value imported in 1830, of protected articles, amounted to ,529,120,62? 

Consistinn- of Wool, Woollens, Cottons, Wood and Afanufactures of do. 
Glass-ware, Iron and Stcc',!!nd Manufactures of do-, Clothing ready made, 



16 

Notwithstanding tliese deductions from the revenue, and from 
the duties on protected articles, it is asserted m an Address "To 
the People of South Carolina," from our Senators and six of our 
Representatives, that the burthens imposed upon the Southern 
States, Will be greater by the Act of July, 1832, than they are by 
the existnig Tariff. As this assertion may make an injurious im- 
pression upon the pubiic mind, I will transcribe that part of "the 
Address" which is ntended to establish it, and br.eliy annex such 
remarks as may prevent the errors which it is calculated to dissem- 
inate. According to certain passages in " the Add' ess," " the bur- 
thens of the prolecllng duties are decidedly increased, estimating 
the cash duties and diminished credits, and they now actually 
stand at an average of more than 50 per centv, while the duties on 
the unprotected articles, wh:ch upon every principle of equality and 
justice, siiouid sustain the principal part of the burthens of taxa- 
tion, aie, with a few inconsiderable exceptions, entirely repealed. 
Upon those manufactiu-cs which are received in exchange for the 
staple productions of the Southern States, the aggregate increase 
of the burthens of taxation, beyond what they were under the Ta- 
riff of 1828, is believed to be upwards of ,$1,000,000, while the re- 
duction or repeal of the duties on those iniports which are received 
in exchange for the productions of the Tariff States, amoimts to 
about ^4,000,000. While, therefore, the aggregate burthens of 
taxation are diminished $4,000,000 by tliis BUI, the positive bur- 
thens of the Sovuhein Slates are not diminished at all, and their. 
relative burthens are very greatly increased." 

It has already been noticed, that the Tariff Act of 1832, as com- 
pared with that which is now in force, reduces the duties upon pro- 
tected articles by the amount of |; 1,869,056. If, notwithstanding 
this reduction, the protecting duties are increased, this increase must 
be occasioned by " estimating the cash duties and diminished credits.^* 
Now, the cash duties are confined to the importations on Woollens, 
and their amount would be equal to 1-4 per cent, in the rate of 
duty, upon Woollens not costing more tlian 35 cents the square 
yard, upon which the duty is 5 per cent., and on Woollens costing- 
more than 35 cents the square yard (6t' which tlie value of be- 
tween 2 and 3 millions are imported) it is 2 1-2 per cent, increase 
in the rate of duly, such cloth being subject to aduty of 50 per cent, 
on the rest of our importations, " the diminished credits" are 
equal to an increase of a fraction less than 3-4 per cent., the average 

Hats, C arpeting, Sail Duck, Cotton Bagging, Molasses, Brown Sugar, In- 
digo, Cordage and Tvvine, Hemp, Salt,"Coal, Window Glass, Leather, and 
Manufactures of do.. Marble, and Manufactures of do., nil Cloths, Japan- 
ned, Plated, Gilt, Pewter, Brass, and Leaden Ware — duty on the above ar- 
ticles under the existing Tariff, 12,831,772 
Do. under the Tariff of July, 1832, 10,962,716 

Reduction on protected articles, $l,869j056 



11 - 

rate of duty on all importations, excepting Woollens, being about 
25 per cent.* 

It not a little excites my surprise, that a paper of so grave a 
ciiaracter as "the Address," which it is presumed, was drawn up 
with the utmost deliberation, should hazard the assertion, that "the 
duties on the unprotected articles, aie, icith a Jew inconsiderable excep' 
tions, entirely repealed,''^ when the duties upon all the articles "declar- 
ed to be free" by the Act of 1832, which are estimated by the Re- 
fistcr of the Treasury in his statement, amounts to no more than 
400,000 ; and the duties upc.n the lesidue of the unprotected arti- 
cles, which are not estimated, but ascertained front official data, 
amount, according to the same statement to $2,709,671. The 
amount of the duties upon unprotected articles, by the Act 
of 1832, is $4,164,248, as is obvious in the underwritten note.f 
" The Address " has not furnished us with any data to sup- 
port the positions, that upon the " manufactures received in ex- 
change for staple productions of the Southern States — the ag- 
gregate taxation is believed to be increased upwards of $1,000,000," 
beyond the Tariff of 1828, "while the reduction" or repeal of 

* On a close calculation, omitting the 10 and 20 per cent, addition to the value on 
goods paying ad valorem duties, the tbllowing is the difierence arising from the altera- 
tion of the pound sterling, and the cash duties with shortened credits. 

The reduction on protected articles will be $1,869,056 

Deduct interest on cash duties on Woollens, amount of M'hich being 
1,953,159, for 10 months, at 6 per cent per annum, JJ97,65S 

Do. on duties on other protected articles, amount being $9,- 
009,557 for 5 1-2 months, at 6 per cent, per annum, 247,763 

$345,421 
Difference originating from change in the pound sterlingt affect- 
ing imports from Great Britain, paying ad valorem duty, amount 
of these imports being ,$14,514,657, and the difference $1,075,160, 
at the average rate of duty on protected articles 37 5-8 per cent, is 404,528 

749,949 



Nett reduction on protected articles, $1,119,107 

A-dding the 10 and 20 per cent, would increase the above to about $1,550,000 

t The aggregate amount of duties under the new Bill, is CBtimated at $15,126,959 
Deduct duties on protected articles, 10,962,716 

Leaves a dut}' on unprotected articles of $4,164,843 

Add interest for 5 1-2 months shortened credits, at the rate of 6 per cent, 
per annum, $114,516 

Difference from change in the pound sterling on imports from 
Great Britain, paying ad valorem duties, amount of the imports 
being $7,400,852, and the difference $548,210, at the average rate 
of duty on unprotected articles, 14 3-8 per cent* 78,805 

193,321 



Total amount of duties on unprotected articles, $4,357,564 

The increase in the aggregate amount of the duties without the 10 and 20 per cent. 

and adding the difference from the new valuation of the pound sterling with Cvd^h dutJtlS 

ajjd shortened credits, is $943,270, equal to about \ #-S per cent. 



the duties on those imporfs Avhichare received in exchange lor the 
pioductions ol the Tarifi' States, amounts to about $4,000,000." 
How this gross inequality in the distribution of burthens and ben- 
elitg is produced, by tlie Act of 1833, I am unable to imagnie. Up- 
on some woollens, the duties will be rather higlierfhan they are 
now, but the aggregate of the duties upon wooiiens, will be very 
considerahhj less. The duties upon cottons vriil be reduced in al- 
most every instance, ftnd increased in none. Upon siilcs, the dutjes 
will be largely reduced. The duties upon iron, hemp, cotton bag- 
ging, sugars and wines, are all diminished in greater or smaller ra- 
tios. The staple productions of the South being received in ex- 
change for every one of the commodities which I have enumerated, 
if the duties upon them be reduced, it necessarily folloAvs, so far as re- 
lates to these commodities (and they constitute the great articles 
of importation) that the burthen of Southern taxation will be 
diminished. Neither can I discover what " reduction or," repeal 
of the duties on these imports which are received in exchange 
for the productions of the Tarilf States, amounts to about $4,- 
000,000." I have specified the important articles upon winch 
the duties will be reduced, after March 1833, and it is known 
to eveiy merchant, that for the more valuable proportion of 
them, the productions of the South are received in exchange, 
in a greater degree, than are those of the North, whilst the Cotton 
and Rice of the Soutliern States are aimost, exclusively, exchang- 
ed for the Wmes of Spain and Portugal, and for the Silks and 
Wines of France, and their Rice and Lumber for the Sugars of the 
West Indies. The North will be benititted by the reduction of the 
duties upon indigo and upon raw wool not costing more than 8 cents, 
the pound, and by the repeal of the duties upon madder, wood, co 
chineal, and some other materials used in dyeing and as ingre- 
dients in the process of manufacturing; but the community partici- 
pates in those advantages, as the effect must, necessarily, be to low- 
er the price of manufactures. With respect to the repeal of the du- 
ties upon teas and coffee,and the reduction of the duty upon India 
silks, I will submit the following communication which I have re- 
ceived from one of the most enlightened and experienced mer- 
chants in this city ; " Nothing is more certain than that the South- 
ern States will be more than, proportionately, benefitted by any in- 
creased consumption of teas and East India silks, that will take 
place in consequence of the reduction of the duties upon them; be- 
cause the course of trade is now so changed, that compared with 
former times, little or no specie is exported. The India merchant 
now, either furnishes himself with bills drawn by the United States 
Bank on London, at twelve months dates (which pay in India at 
a pi-emium) or he purchases merchants' bihs, at ordinary sights on 
L sndon and lodges his fuiids there, ordering his ship to touch at- 
Gibralter, where he can draw for his London funds, at 10 to 15 per 



IB 

cent advance, and lie has dollars at par, or at most from 1 lo 2 per 
cent, premium, these d.)llais being procured, entirely, from Spain, 
in payment of our rice, cotton tobacco, &c. carried into that coun- 
try by her own subjectss, clandestinely. If the Bank furnishes the 
India Bills, it covers them, l)y merchants' drafts on England. 
Thus, whether the India cargo be piocured by Bank ])ills or specie, 
they are all raised by bills on Enaland, which bills are almost alto- 
gether found by Southern rice and cotton. Thus it plainly and in- 
coutrovertibly appears, that the South furnishes the piincipal part 
of the funds for India cargoes, and, consec[uently, must be greatly 
benefitted by the increased consumption of those articles; and who 
will deny, that in the increased consumption of coffee, by being free 
of duty, that the South is benefitted, in a double ratio, when they 
are told that the Island of Cul»a alone lakes about 30,000 casks of 
rice, with lumber and other articles of its produce. No State in 
the Union furnishes more, if as much of West India cargoes, as 
South Carolina." The want of the semblance of a foundation for 
the assertion in "the Address,'* that the positive burthens of the 
Southern States are not dhninisbed, and their relative burthens ve- 
ry greatly increased," is plainly demonstrated by the facts I have 
stated. As to those items exempted from the payment of duties 
by the act of 1832, to which I have not, particularly, adverted, I 
will only remark, that the South and tiije North arc relieved by 
those cxemptions,exactly in ratio proportionate to tlieir consumption. 
It is alleged in all the nev/spapers in this State, which adopt the 
reasoning of "the Address," that no spirit of compromise or concilia- 
tion entered into the composition of the late Tariff Act, and that 
its sole object was to confer additional bounties upon the Tariff 
States, and to increase the burthen upon the Planting States. My 
opinion of that Act I have already expressed; and it is not my in- 
tention now to ascribe to it merits which I have hitherto denied 
loit; but I cannot refrain from admitting, that the act of July, 
1832, does contain some provisions which proceeded from a spirit of 
compromise and conciliation on the part of the advocates of pro- 
tection. It is notorious that loud and reiterated complaints were 
made in the Southern States, and particularly in South Carolina, 
on account of the high duties upon coarse woollens and blankets, 
and upon cotton bagging, and that the duties upon them were di- 
minished, to gratify and conciliate the South. After Marcli, 1833, 
upon coarse woollens, of a value not exceeding 35 cents the scjuare 
yard, and upon blankets, of a value not exceeding 75 cents each, 
the duty w'i\\ be almost nominal, being 5 per cent, ad valorem; and 
upon cotton bagging, the duty will be reduced from 5 to 3 1-2 cents 
the sc|uare yard. I have read in numerous publications in the news- 
papers in this city, that the woollens and the blankets which are 
imported by the planters for their negroes, cannot be pvuchased at 
the '^'•'ces limited by the Act, so as to be included within the reduc* 



14 

ed duty of five per cent. My reply to this stateiiient, I should 
presume, wou:d be perfectly satisfactory. I am informed by the 
most competaiit and respectible authority, that such woollens and 
blankets as the planters are in the habit of importmg for their 
negroes, can now be purchased abroad at the prices specified in the 
Act, and that no doubt IS entertained that this will be the case, 
after that act shall be in force. Should this, howe^'er, be an error, 
as the reduction of the duiies upon these articles was made, and 
was expressed to be made, by the advocates of the protective sys- 
tem, exclusive 1 el y, for the accomodation of the South; and as they 
repeatedly and positively declared, that the articles could be pro- 
cured at the prices mentioned, I cannot hesitate, to believe, if the 
fact be otherwise, that upon satisfactorily establishing^ it, such a 
law would be passed at the next session of Congress as would rec- 
tify the mistake. However desirous the restrictionists may be 
and unquestionably are, to preserve what they consider to be 
their interests, it Vv^ould be doing them injustice to suspect them 
of so gross a dereliction of principle, as a deliberate design to de- 
fraud, or of the commission of so egregious an act of folly, as to 
calculate upon being able to deceive, Avhen the means of detection 
would be so soon and so easily afforded. 

The minimums upon woollens, which created peculiar discon- 
tent, for the strongest and most obvious reasons, have also been 
abolished for the gratification of the South. In several of our 
newspapers, it has been insisted, that the benefit of this abolition 
has been more than counterbalanced, by the imposition of a duty, 
imder the act of 1832, of 50 per cent, ad vaiorem upon all wool- 
len cloths costing more than 35 cents the square yard. Let me, 
b iefly, demonstrate the unsoundness of this objection. By the 
existing Tariff, woollen cloths not costing more than 33 1-3 cente 
the square yard, pay a duty of 11 cents the square yard, which is, 
actually 54-45 }>er cent ad valorem. Woollens costing 33 1-3 cents 
the square yard, and not more than 50 cents, are estimated at 50 
cents the square yard, and pay a duly of 45 per cent, ad valorem, 
which is, actually, 48 per cent. — Woollens costing 50 cents, and 
not more than $1, the square yard, are estimated at ^1, and pay 
a duty of 45 per cent., which is actually, 50-59 per cent, ad valo- 
rem. Woollens costing ^^1, and not more than ^3.50 the square 
yard, are estimated at ^2.50, and pay a duty of 45 per cent, ad 
valorem, which is, actually, a duty of 54-82 per cent, ad valorem. 
Woollens cosnng ^?.50 and not more than $4, the square yard, 
are estimated at ,^4, and pay a duty of 45 per cent ad valorem, 
which is, actually, 61-59 per cent, ad valorem. All woollen cloths 
costing over ^4 the square yard pay a duty of 50 per cent, ad va'-o- 
rem, which with the aditional 10 per cent, under the Tariff of 1828, 
is 55 per cent, ad valorem. The foregoing duties which I have 
stated as actually, paid, are taken from aii official document of the 



15 

Treasuiy Depaitment. It is thus seen that the existing duties, 
in every item, exceed those of the Act of 1832, excepting upon 
woollen cloths costing between 33 1-3 cents, and 50 cents, the 
square yard, and between 50 cents and ^1, the square yard, when 
they arc less, in a very small degree, but upon such as cost more 
than ^1, the scprare yard, they are, considerably, higher. Tliis 
difference in the rate of the duties is by no means, the principal 
benefit derived from the late Act; for by the substitution of ad val- 
orem for minimum duties, the manufacturers are deprived of \\ liat 
amounts almost to a monopoly, in the home market as to all woollen 
cloths, the prices of which are between the minimum reductions. 
This fact was, opejity, and repeatedly avowed in the House of ReprQ- 
sentatives, during the pendency of the Bill, in the last session of 
Congress, and it was owing to the abolition of the minimums upcn 
woollens, that the leading advocates of "the American System," 
were so hostile to the passage of the law.* 

I have thus Fellow-Citizens, submitted to you my reasons for 
the vote which I gave upon the passage of the late Tariff act, and 
my views of that act, both in its immediate effects, and as com- 
pared with the existing Tariff. I feel confident that my vote ^^ ill 
be approved of by all of you, who prefer conciliation and comprom- 
ise to a rupture with the members of oiu- confederacy. When a sys- 
tem has long been established, which extensively controls the 
national capital and labor, however unwisely it may have been 
introduced, it cannot euddcniy be abolished, without spreading 
desolation and ruin among millions, and communicating a perilous 
shock to our tranquillity and security.— Hov/ever toe may deprecate 
a protective tariff, in its principles and in its details — however, in- 
dignantly, we may arraign the motives in which it originated and 
the conseqviences resulting from it, tJie majority of the people, arej 
nevertheless convinced that it is warranted by the Constitution, and 
recommended by the soundest policy. From the prevalence of 
these sentiments amomg the majority and the legislative encom"- 
agement of them by high and stimulating protective duties, im- 
mense capitals have been invesled in numerous and complicated 

*Mr Everett, of VciTnont, said, wliut in suli?tance was repeated by several other 
members v.-ho advocated protection, " he considered that system (the inininiunis) as 
affording the most efficient protection, with the least burthen on the consumer. I'hc 
opeiationof that rystcm had been misrepresented. He liad been surprised to hear 
gentlemen affirm that it. levied duties of 100, of 150, and even 225 per cent. A yard 
of cloth costing $1, pays 45 cents, and a yard coating- one dollar and one cent, it is true, 
ij imported, would pay 1 12 1-2 cents, v.'hi( h v.ould'be at die rate of 112 per cent, so a 
yard costing 50 cents would pay 22 1-2 cents, and a yard costing 51 cents, if imported, 
45 cents, being at the rate of 90 per cent. But what was the fact? ./Vo c!«ths chargea- 
ble ivith these high duties tcere imparled. The importations whore confined lo Cloths va- 
lued ai or a liltle under the miniinums. The effect then, v/as prohibiiion of the importa- 
tion of nioit of the Cloths beticecn the 'minimums. Cf those excluded, the clolhs of the 
intermcdi'itc va'.ues : the Am.eriean Maniifaeturer will have the whole market.''^ Ex- 
tract from Mr. Everett's speech on tiie Tariff' biJl, delivered ISth J vine, 1832, as pubii^Ji- 
Gd in tlie National Intelligencer. 



10 

Branches of human industry, which, it must be obviotis, oug-hi 
not to be interfered with, excepting with the utmost caution, de- 
liberation and forbearance. Thus impressed with the importance, 
the intricacy and the dehcacy of this subject, when the considera- 
tion of the Tariff was brought up, during the last session of Con- 
gress, my anticipations of its improvement were hmited to such, 
alterations, as would lighten some of its burthens obliterate some of 
its most obnoxious enactments, and manifest a temper and dispo- 
sition indicative of still farther ameliorations. When the founda- 
tions of the system should be thus underminded, the cheering pros- 
pect would be presented, that Congress would gradually act upon 
the principles which ought never to be lost sight of — that domes- 
tic industry should only be incidentally protected, by duties upon 
foreign importations. Although the Tariff act of 1833 is, in my 
opinion imperfect, although it still retains no small portion of its 
ancient defects, although it still requires great and radical improve- 
ments, yet it does appear to me that it makes such approaches to 
what it ought to be, as to render it worthy of acceptance, at this 
time, to every patriotic and reflecting Statesman, who seeks to 
to obtain the recognition of the principles of Free Trade, by tem- 
perate and practicable means. 

To what extent the duties and the revenue will be reduced by 
the late Tariff Act, I have already shown. Surely a diminution 
in the protecting duties of ^1,869,056, and in the aggregate of 
the revenue from the customs of $5,187,078, is a relief, in the gross 
and inthedetail. Surely a diminution in taxation, which reduces 
their nett receipts, from $17,288,645 to $12,101,567, is a general 
benefit. These ameliorations, combined with some concessions to 
the South, and the repeal of the minimums upon woollens, ought 
to be hailed with some satisfaction, as the harbingersof better times, 
and as leading to a more auspicious consummation ; and more es- 
pecially, ought we to be inspired with confidence, when it is recol- 
lected that these reformations were effected, although they were 
opposed to the utmost, by the firmest zealots in the cause of protection, 
and although the bill which contained them, was voted against by 
six of our own delegation, in the House of Representatives. If 
thus much was achieved against obstacles so formidable, the hope 
is proportionately flattering, that those who are wdling to sacrifice 
the pride of opinion and the lust of power, to a spirit of -amity and 
compromise, and to lay their resentments, and passions, and preju- 
dices, upon the altar of their common country, will accomplish 
greater objects, by their judicious and persevering appeals, address^ 
»d to the reason, good sense, and real interests of the community. 
Bv honest exertions thus directed, it may well be anticipated, that 
the delusions which have been created by a selfish theory, will be 
dispelled — ^hat the revenue, at no distant period, will be limited to 
the proper expenses of the government— that the Tariff will be soreg- 



17 

niiii'eu,as equally to diffupe its burthens and its blessings 
among a free, a prosperous, and a united people. When 
a career has been opened, which may carry us to the goal 
at which we would arrive, sliall we stop short in the progress 
to which we are invited ? — shall we, supinely, slumber on 
our posts, when the victory may be won by discretion and perse- 
verance *? Shall we, instead of availing ourselves of that " tide 
in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood leads on to prosper- 
ous fortune," abandon whatever is dear to us as patriots, whatso- 
ever renown we have derived from our ancestors, whatsoever of glo- 
ry we have acquired abroad, and whatsoever of liberty and happi- 
ness we have enjoyed at Ik nie, and rashly barter away these ines- 
timable treasures, to plunge into the vortex of Nullification? Shall 
we yieid ourselves to be entangled in the mazes of a political ab- 
straction, which is either so subt'e or so paradoxical as to mock the 
understanding, or so false and so pernicious as to lead us into error 
and danger 1 Shall we, with our senses awakened, andourfacu'- 
ties roused, and our vigor unimpaired, march tamely under the 
banners of those, who, while they profess to put down usurpation, 
themselves usurp a power paramount to the Constitittion and the 
laws — who, while they proclaim, that they will emancipate us from 
federal oppression, by a peaceful, efficient and legitimate remedy, 
would reduce us, eithei' to the alternative of submitting to the gov- 
ernment, which we resisted, or of seceding from the Federal Union! 
The first alternative would be degrading hiuniliation. Should we 
adopt the other, the United States, from the im}:>erious dictates of' 
self-defence, wouM prescribe to us such terms, as woulfi peevent 
them from being injured by our seperate commercial laws and 
regulations; and to deliver ourselves from their invasion of our Sov- 
ereignty; should we resort to an ally, the price of his aid, would bo 
the sacrifice of our independence. 

I will dwell no longer upon such gloomy scenes. That the Su- 
preme Ruler and Director of human afi'airs, may in his mere)', 
so incline our hearts and guide oitr counsels, that the fierce and stor- 
my passions which threatens us withcivil dissention — which distract 
our social intercourse, which embitter the hai mony of our domestic 
circles, shall be banished from our bosoms, and only be remember- 
ed as solemn and endu ing warnings for the future, is the fervent 
prayer of your faithful and obedieut fellow citizen. 

WM. DRAYTON. 



■f^' 



Q 



TO THE PEOPLE 

or 
THU ST.ITE OF SOtITH'€:,nROIjMJV.fi* 



CHARLESTON, Isl DECEMBER, 183^. 

Fellow Citizens: 

The Ordinakce passed by your Convention ^at Columbia, a few 
»^ays since, as the supreme law of the land, is the grave, not the bri- 
dal chamber of Liberty. However ihe power and the triumph of 
party, may dignify it, in the hour of its birth, with titles of glor}'^ 
and praise, no spirit of proj)hecy is needful to know, that when the 
revels of that unholy spirit shall have passed away, it will be regar* 
ded, even in the South-Carolina of future years, with giief an-d moi'- 
tification. In the sacred name of Liberty, they have struck her 
down to the earth, with the iron mace of the despot. In the name 
of Liberty, they have forged for their fellow-citizens the chains of 
Slavery. In the pure and holy name of Liberty, the}' have pollu- 
ted her slirine, they have laid on her altar the oflerings of idolatry, 
they have trodden their fellow-worshipers under their feet. 

When I look at the Age, in which I live; at the history of my 
Countr}^; and at her actual state of political improvement: when I 
consider the wisdom and forbearance, that have distinguished Ameri- 
can counsels; and the magnanimity, which has always been one of 
the noblest elements of Carolina character, I am filled with aston- 
ishment and grief at a measure, which must be repented of, in the 
sackcloth and ashes of shame and sorrow. God grant it may not be 
our lot to repent of it, in tears and blood, amid the ravages of fire 
and sword! Whatever may be the feeling respecting this Ordinance, 
among the majority in Carolina, it is impossible not to know, that 
it must be regarded wi(h mournful indignation by all the friends of 
freedom throughout the world. In the rest of our Union, it can on- 
ly be viewed, as a reproach to the memory of the illustrious dead of 
1776 and 1789: and as an act of ingratitude to their sacrifices and 
services. Among the Whigs of England, what other opinion could 
be held, than that you have forfeited all title to the glorious attributes 
even of British freedom. They will tell you, that in an age of light, 
and in a country of laws and of regulated freedom, you have sought 
for your instruments of power, in the armory of b3'gone ages, amid 
the darkness and violence of dethroned Tyrants and baffled Oppres- 
sors. They will tell )'ou, that at this day in Great Britain, not even 
a Whig Administration, with a Whig Parliament, could venture thus 



to disfranchise a British subject. Tliey will tell you, tluit no jjovVti* 
in Britain would hold the magna charta of British Liberty, as cheaj> 
as your Convention have held the holy constitutions of Carolina and 
the Union. 

1 ask no pardon, I make no apology for the boldness and frankness, 
with which I speak. I am still a freeman: and the Convention may 
be assured, that so long as the liberty of Speech and the liberty of 
the Press shall remain, tliera will be thousands, who will speak and 
write, as fearlessly as I do. And have they yet to learn, that the 
confiscation of property, the imprisonment of the body, nay the 
loss of life itself, have no terrors for the brave and the free? Have 
they yet to learn that the dungeon and the scafi'old are the pageantry 
of tyrants, in the eyes of the Martyr to civil or religious liberty? 
Are they yet to learn, that they may torture the body, but cannot 
subdue the soul: that they may give the freeman a victim to their 
power; but cannot make him the slave of their will? Have they, in- 
deed, yet to learn, after all the solemn lessons that Liberty has taught 
amid the fires of persecution and the martyr blood of her children, 
that the freeman, like the christian, counts property, liberty, and 
life, as dust and ashes, in comparison of his principles and indepen- 
dence? And I have studied in vain the history of free communities, 
and especialy of this country : and I have loved and venerated in 
vain the noble qualities of American and Carolina character, if there 
be not thousands in this State, who are ready in the same cause, to 
yield up property to your confiscation acts, liberty to the loathsome- 
ness of your dungeons, and life itself to the tragedy of your scaf- 
folds. The punishments you may inflict, may be ignominious in your 
eyes; but posterity will honor them as the sufferings of the virtuous 
free. You may bratid the grave of your victim, as the grave of the 
Traitor; but the very next age will hallow it as the bed of glory. 
You may consign him to the death of the malefactor; but your own 
children shall acknowledge his title even to their gratitude and ad- 
miration. You may follow him with scorn and execrations to the 
gallows: may he be strengthened from above, to make the last act ot 
his life, a prayer for his destroyers! 

I have already expressed my opinion, that the Legislature, which 
called the Convention into being, was itself unconstitutionaly convo- 
ked. I adhere to that opinion: and of course, I cannot regard them 
as a Convention, constitutionaly assembled. I have no doubt, thac 
the time will come, when the dispassionate mind of Carolina will 
pronounce the same judgment. Whether that will avail aught, be 
yond affixing the brand of a double reprobation to all that t1iey have- 
done, is of little consequence, now. But it is a consolation to know, 
that tlie triumph of principles is as sure, as they arc immortal: and 
that party spirit is the more perishable, the greater its violence and 
injustice. I shall not dwell on tiie unnatural and inequitable princj 
pie,* on which the representation in the Convention was fixed: a mode 

* I urderstand it was said the other evening at the Circus, that if this objection availed 
ajjy thijj2> the result would be^, that wc had not lawfully adopted the Constitution of 1 7W 



scarcely reconcilable with the fumiameiital principles of the social 
compact, in any other Countr)'; and utterly inconsistent with \Uc\n 
in this. Nor shall I dwell on the fact, that they have not sent back 
to you for your confirmation or rejection, the Ordinance, which the 
delegates of the People, not the Peo])le themselves, have ordained 
as the supreme law of the land, against, the Constitution of the State, 
and of the Union. To you they arc accountable: and yet whilst 
they wielded your power, they have not ventured to trust their ex- 
ercise of it to your deliberate judgment. They arc the Masters of 
the People for a year; but they have forgotten that you may yet tell 
them, that you never diil authorise, nor will ever sanction the deeds, 
which they iiave iloiie. In their hands is the power to curse and de- 
NStroy: may 3'ou not iind when it is too lale, that they are irresponsi- 
})le to you, for the firebrands and the ruin, they ma}' scatter over 
your land! You may yet find, to your irreparable loss, to your in- 
consolable grief, that the tyrany of laws, is more injurious to free- 
dom, than the tyrany of Praetorian bands and standing armies. 

State necessity, which has ever been the plea of the Tyrant and 
Oppressor, whether single handed or many headed, in every age and 
country, is their only justification for violating some of the most im- 
portant principles of the social compact, as established by our Ame- 
rican Constitutions. These have been hitherto, regarded as too sc- 

or that of the U. S. Now let iis look a little at the history of this matter. The Conl 
stitution of 1776 was the act of a revolutionary Congres.s: that of 1778 was an act of 
the Legislature: neither therefore is a precedent; tliough every one acquainted with the 
Constitutional history of S. Carolinn ought to l.now, that the rule of representation un- 
der both of those had nothing to do with the representation 0^ property. This is cqualy 
true of the Constitution of 1790, in which on the face of it the representation is scttleil 
without any regard to property. The compovnd ratio of population and property, we 
ought all to know, was r?o^ introduced MM fi7 the amendment ratified Dec. 1808. One 
would really suppose, from the argument used at the Circus, that this compound princi- 
ple had been in force and operation in 1789 and 17S0, when the presest State and Na- 
tional Constitutions were adopted. So far from it, all the Legiskitures and Conventions 
prior to 1S08 were constituted on the principle of representing persons only. Let us 
now see if the Amendment of 1808 is any justification to the Legislature. In my opin- 
ion, it is not. A Convention represents the People: the Genera! Assembly, the People 
and their property. That is a popular, primary assembly — this but a legislative, deri\ a- 
tive one. The first rests on the fundamental political social compact — the second is the 
creature of that compact. The former contains in itself all the elements of power, lolii 
the granted and the reserved — the latter, only the granted power, and that to one depart- 
ment out of three But 1 think the Constitution has settled the question by the Ist Sec. 
of the 9th Article. "Aj.l power is originally vestSd in the Pkople: and 
all free governments are founded on their authority, and are instituted for their poarc, 
safety and happiness." Surely this clause recognizes no principle of the representative 
quality of property: nor that any portion of primitive, popular power is derived from 
property. When the People submitted to a vote of two-thirds of each branch of two 
successive Legislatures, a new question of Amendment, did they indicate a similar ru.'o 
forthegovernniisnt of a9««/ori/y only of one body, and that purely a popular ow* 
How then could the Amendment of 1808, which rHated exdusivdy to a Legi.'^lativr 
body, have any bearing on the call of a Convention? Before the Anaendir.ent of 1808, 
(and that was clearly a compromise, as well as the principle of slave representation in 
he National Constitution) no one ever doubted that even Legislative representation w s 
founded on persons onhj, not on persons and property. The old role must and ougi.t 
then still to govern, in the case of a ConrevtioiK for it l»ns never bee* abrogated, oi- 
pre«§lv or ev^ bv imulicatbrin. 



x-.i-e, to need any oilier defences than the bulwarks of the Consrttu- 
tion: too sacred to be entrusted even to the unanimous vote of Le- 
gislative bodies. The Convention have placed on record, as a part 
of the history of your country, the maxims of Tyrany, that potver 
can do no iv?'onff; that f/ie end justifies the means; that the minor- 
ity is the property of the maprity. History is Philosophy teach- 
ing by example: and, how strikingly and awfuly, will the page of 
their deeds teach generations yet unborn! In comparison with this 
Ordinance, the Alien and Sedition Laws were harmless, and a dead 
letter on the Statute book: and considering the age, in which we live, 
the country of which we arc citizens, and the inen, who have done 
the deed, no other age, no other country, no other men, have ever 
struck such a blow at Liberty. The spectacle excites the more awe 
and pain, because the children of Liberty have exchanged her olive- 
branch of peace and love, for the scourge of penal chastisement; and 
the sword of justice, for the iron rod of the oppressor. 

I protest, in the name of Liberty, before my country and the 
world, against the very principle, upon which they have based all 
their proceedings. It amounts to this: that the people can do 
NO WRONG. But, my respected, my beloved fellow citizens, the 
people can do wrong: and those are faithless counselors, who do not 
teach you firmly and caution you solemnly, that there are certain vi- 
tal fundamental principles, without which, you must cease to be a 
free peo])le, or to enjoy a republican government. The People can 
do wrong: and the acts of the Convention, if the)' be regarded as the 
acts of the People, are irrefragable testimony, that you can do wrong. 
But I rejoice, amidst the gloom which surrounds us, that the 
People, have not as yet acknowledged an act, which, if the act of 
Liberty, is suicide. 

It is the very basis of a free government, tha*" the Legislature are 
a limited body. But the Ordinance has conferred upon them the 
unlimited power to do any and every act, which may be necessary 
to give it effect. Nor has it left them any discretion; for it has not 
merely authorized, but has commanded them to do whatever is 
needful. Their'' s then is the discretion of tyrany, co-extensive 
with what they may regard as the demands of State necessity. 
And do you expect them to set any value on the other landmarks of 
freedom, when the Convention have set such an example of utter dis- 
regard for many of the most sacred? After what they have done, 
rould you reproach the Legislative Body with breaches of the Con- 
stitution, with outrages on liberty, if they should abolish the freedom 
uf Speech and the Liberty of the Press? Have they not an unques- 
tionable right, as far as the Ordinance could give it, to declare the 
civil subordinate to the military power; to pass bills of attainder and 
€xpost facto laws; to impose excessive fines and inflict unusual pun- 
ishments; to deprive of the trial by jury, even in civil cases, any 
man, who will not subscribe the oath of allegiance they may pre- 
scribe; to confiscate half or even the whole of his property, if he 
should refuse; to discharge from their contracts all, who are his debt-. 



ors; to disqualify liiiii as a witness in any case, in wliicli one of tin 
opposite party is concerned; to disarm him; to deny liim counsel or 
witness, and to suspend the Habeas Corpus act? Can it be denied 
that they have power to do this? In a season of profound peace; 
under the action of balanced and rcgula^ed systems; with the secu- 
rity of written Constitutions, and the pure, independent administra- 
tion of justice; they have clothed your Legislature, under the plen 
of State necessity, with the despotic jiower of a Revolutionary Con- 
gress. Shall it be said that they will not use it? If they obey the 
commands and imitate the example of the Ordinance, there is no- 
thing they cannot, nothing they will not do, wdiich they may judge 
necessary. Yes, if necessity shall demand it in their opinion, they 
may repeal tbe very act, which called you into being; annihilate you 
by your own authority; construct a new government; and give to 
the State a Dictator or a Directory. Jiiid this is the wisdom of fhi'. 
children of Liberty, these the safe^idirds they have provided for 
her! 0! what a fountain of grief and almost of despair has thus 
been opened for the sons of freedom in Europe! How shall the 
monarchs of Russia and Austria glory and exult over the scene! 
How shall the palaces of Naples, and Prussia, and Spain be filled 
with mockery of freedom, and with the revelry of despots and their 
courtiers, rejoicing over the errors and folly of Republicanism! 

Not content wnth bestowing on the Legislature this unlimited 
power and commanding the use of it, the Ordinance has provided, 
that they should have no excuse, for not employing it to the utmost. 
Lest they might suppose that they were to be bound by the Consti- 
tution of the Union or the State, it has given them such precedents, 
that they cannot doubt the intention to be, that no constitutional re- 
straints are to be regarded. How can they do otherwise than em- 
ploy violent and unjust measures, when it has set before them uncon- 
stitutional objects to be attained? You still are acknowledged to be 
in the Union, and to be bound by its Constitution. Now, the People, 
and Legislature, and Courts of this State have never doubted, much 
less denied, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the Union over 
CASES in laiv or equity, betiveen individval parties, tho' one be a 
public officer: and still less has it been or coidd it be doubted or de- 
nied, if the United States be a party. And yet the Ordinance trans- 
fers this undoubted, this undisputed jurisdiction to a State Tribunal; 
tho' the validity of an authority claimed under the Laws and Con- 
stitution of the Union, be the very gist of the suit. The Convention 
acknowledge the right of the Union to ''coerce the State," and "to 
enforce the acts" "through the civil tribunals of the country:" and 
3'et they haA-e vested exclusive jurisdiction over the whole subject, 
on a national question, in State tribunals. And, as tho' in mockery 
of the very names of Judge, and Trial, and Jury, as hitherto under- 
stood, they have bound the Judge and Jury to disVegard Constitutions, 
Law and Evidence, and to decide according to a fixed paramount rule. 
I envy not the Judge or the Juryman, who is fit to be their instru- 
ments. Were I a Judge or a Juryman, before I would pollute mr 



SiOiil and ueiile my Jips with such an oath, tliis right hand siionld be 
struck off as a cockade for the cap of a Dictator; or a sia;a-board to 
point the way to the gibbet. What niore could a despot do, than say 
to his subject, you may have the bentht of a Judge and Jury: but I 
shall so ordain, that they shall kever decide in YovRjcivor? What 
would such a Judge and Jury he, but Commissioners to execute his 
des])otic will to the letter; and tvhat are theirs under this Ordinance? 
A despot himself would not deign to call that atrial: and assuredly 
the Legislature, if the}' deem it necessai-y, will soon dispense witli 
such useless machinery. 

Certiiinly you cannot believe, that the Supreme Court of the United 
States will ever acknowledge the authority of that Ordinance: or 
sufTor themselves to be baffled by that or any acts of the Legislature. 
If a Rfjpublican Government, in spirit and in truth, shall ever again ex- 
ist in Carolina, ybr // ceased with that Ordinance, all the judgments, 
whicli shall be rendered by your tribunals, will be reversed. Un 
shackle the consciences of j^our own Judges, and even they nuKst re- 
verse them. But the Supreme Court, in any event, will cancel them; 
and the mode of obtaining possession of the case will be provided in 
the spirit and language of one of your own Courts in a far less ex- 
traordinary case: "if there were no precedents, we must make them." 
Nor can it be believed, that Congress will fall to legislate efficiently, 
in aid of the unquestionable jurisdiction of the highest and most im- 
portint tribunal, knov.-n to the National Constitution and to the States 
themselves. 

The oath of office, which the Ordinance requires of all yourpre^ 
sent officers, is one of its most striking and unjustifiable features. 
You are still acknowledged to be under the Constitution of the L'nited 
States. Your own Constitution prohibits the Legislature from pass- 
ing "any law, impairing the obligation of contracts:" and the Na- 
tional Charter equaly denies to any State, the authority to pass "any 
law impairing the obligation of contrac'.s." Is the State still a mem- 
ber of the Union? If so, and you must admit it, is she not bound 
by this clause? Is your Ordinance the act of the State? Until you 
have disavowed it, you at least cannot doubt it. The Convention, 
then, have in the name of the State, violated an article of that -Con- 
stitution, as palpably, as if the Legislature of the Union were to 
grant a title of nobility. Do you doubt it? Is not an appointment 
to office a contract between the public and the officer? Your own 
Courts have so decided, over and over ogain, in a dozen forms; nor 
can you find a lawyer, who is fit to practice, even In a JNlagistrate's 
Court, who will not acknowledge this fundamental truth. And is 
this a lesson, for freemen to teach? Is this an example for them to 
give to those, whom they brand as usurpers and oppressors? 

Nor is this all. The Constitution of this Stale declares, that "the 
trial by Jury, as heretofore used in this State, and the liberty of the 
Press, shall hit forever inviolably preserved." 'i'hese are fundarnen- 
tal articles in the soeial compact. They are not merely prohibitions 
to tfie Legislature. The^' are a solemn covena-nt qf the people, v^ 



vSouth-Laroluia, by which tliey have plefls;od their faith oml hin.or, 
and bound their descendants by the strongest obligations, that the 
trial by Jury should never be violated, not even by the Pconle them- 
selves. What warrant can the Convention show for such 'a breach 
of sucli a piomiae? Did the People of this State appoint them to 
revolutionize the State (iovernnient? And yet, without such acom- 
niission, they could not lawfuly exercise, one of the highest of rctvy- 
lutlonary powers, that of confisculhig not merely lands and goods, 
hut ojffices, held under the vwsf sacred pledge of public fai/h. — 
Did you place in their hands an unlimited power, to annul t!ie Tarifl' 
Laws, (granting that to have been the distinct commission given to 
them,) by any measures of violence or injustice: by the destruction 
of the very landmarks of liberty; by the" jjalpable infringement of 
your own, and of the National Constitution? The Ordinance is un- 
deniable proof, that such has been their interpretation. But if ever 
the State returns to a calm and settled state of mind; if ever again, 
right, and justice^ and regulated freedom shall be our lot — I may al- 
most say, that I know with absolute certainty, you will anxiously 
place on the records of your history, the most indignant and ener- 
getic disavowal of their acts. 

Not satisfied with infringing the Constitution of the State and of 
the Union, when the People, as you know, designed no such thing; 
they have gone beyond all this, and assuming themselves to be the 
People, they have exercised the highest of sovereign powers, that of 
secession from the Union. And this they have done, not as tho' 
they were the Delegates of the People, but as tho' they were theii* 
Masters. For as delegates, if they had realized the delicacy and 
responsibility of their situation, and the awful consequences of that 
act to yourselves; they would have refered back the solemn question 
of secession to you, as the only rightful judges, in the last resort. 
But they have given you neither time to think, nor opportunity to 
decide; because they knew that you never would sanction such a 
step. Thus have they dragged the State to the precipice of Revolu- 
tion: and appointed the day, when the victim sliall be hurled down 
into the gulf of Disunion and Civil War. That victim, as far as 
man can see, has no chance of escape, but in a counter-revolution, 
that shall restore a Republican Government to the State; or in the 
power of the National Government, to summon fifty thousand of the 
uiilitia from the neighboring States, to execute the laws pf the Union. 

Be not deceived. The Governor has applied for a garrison of two 
thousand men for Charleston, and for an additional force of 10,000 
men; in direct violation of the Constitution of the Union, which 
still binds you, and which prohibits a State from ''keeping troops 
or ships of war, in time of peace." Would this be done, did he 
iiot know, that the General Government will employ force.'* And 
<loes he think to intimidate that Government, powerful as it is in all 
the resources of war, and sustained as it is by an immense majority 
of the Union? Does he hope that the President, as popular in the 
South at thisi^moment, as even Washington himselfj will hesitate to 



call out, il necessary, ten times the number of your State Guard? 
And does Governor Hamilton believe, that the Militia of Virginia, 
and Nurth-Carolina, and Tennessee, and even Georgia, will not o- 
be)^ the summons, to vindicate the authority of the laws? Let the 
order be given, and your fiontiers will bristle with the bayonets of 
brothers; as gallant and fiee as your own soldiers, as devoted to lib- 
erty, as ready to die in her cause, as you can be. It needs not proph- 
ecy to tell you, that you will see what Washington describes as oc- 
curring in 1794. <»There are instances of General Officers going at 
the head of a single troop or of light companies; of field officers 
when tliey came to the place of rcndezvouz, and found no command 
for them in that grade, turning into the ranks as private men; and 
by way of example to others, marching day by day, with their knap- 
sacks at their backs." And be assured that General Jackson will 
imitate the wise and humane ])olicy of Washington, when he called 
out 15,000 men, "as being an army, which, according to all human 
calculation, would be prompt and adequate in every view, and might 
perhaps by rendering resistance desperate, prevent the effusion of 
blood." The President loves his country too well, and values A- 
merican blood too highly, not to resolve that ''the Army of the Con- 
stitution," as Washington called it in 1794, with its banners of the 
stripes and the stars, shall outnumber ten times if necessary, your 
State Guard, with its flag of the solitary star and the border of blood. 
But in truth the Geneial Government has no need of military 
force. You have declared, that Congress shall not collect a dollar 
of revenue in South-Carolina. And if you thus abuse the privileges 
arising out of the rights of ports of entry, can it be doubted that 
Congress will take away the right? It is vain to say that they have 
no authority Xo ^o so. They v^re the judges; and the nation will 
sustain them. Equaly vain is it to say, that they have not the right 
to blockade yourJiarhors. They have the power, and they will use 
it: and the Nation will hail with gratitude and approbation, the em- 
])loyment of a naval, instead of a militai-y force. You know that 
Mr. Jefferson himself held, that Congress had the power, even un- 
der the Confederation, to call out such a force, in order to compel 
the delinquent States to pay their quotas of the national requisitions.* 

* In Jefferson's letter (2 vol. AVorks, p. 87,) to John Adams, dated 11th July, 1786, 
as a reason for providing a navy to coerce the Barbary States, he says "It will arni the 
federal head (the old Congress) with the safest of all the instniments of coercion over its 
delinquent members, and prevent it from using what would be less safe," viz: a milita- 
ry force. 

Again in his letter of 11th August, 1786, to Col. Munroe, (2d vol. Works, p. 43,) in 
speaking of the same subject, he says, "It will be said there is no money in the Treasu- 
ry. There never will be money in the treasury, until the Confederacy shows its teeth. 
The States must see the rod: perhaps it must be felt by some of them." "Every ration- 
al citizen must wish to see an iffective instrument of coercion: and should fear to see 
It, on any other element than the water. A naval force can never endanger our liberties; 
nor occasion bloodshed: a land force would do both." 

Again in his letter of 4th Aug. 1787, to E. Carrington, (2d vol. works p. 203) "It has 
been so often said as to be generally believed that Congress have no power, by the Con- 
federation, to enforce any thing, for example contributioas of money. It was not necessary 



9 

S-iiil loss can it he doubted, that they possess the power, under the 
prrscnt Constitution, to employ the navy to prevent smuggling and 
^nsnre the collection of their own revenue. 

Sufler not yourselves to be deceived by the idea, that the General 
Government will recognize your title to be out of the Union. It is 
perfectly clear that Ihei/ cannot. They have no authority to aban- 
don any portion of the Union. The territory of Carolina was com- 
mitted to their jurisdiction by a Join/ act of the States: and nothing 
short of tliat, or the absolute necessity imposed l)y an unsuccessful 
war, caii release them from the obligations of tliat trust. They are 
commanded and empowered to make all laws necessar)"^ and proper 
to protect the Custom-House and the Post-Oflicc, their Courts and 
Judges, and all their oificers. Canyon doubt that they will do it? — 
T/iei/ must treat Carolina as in the Union, whatever she may say to 
the contrary. If she is to be released, tlic)/ at least can neither no- 
tice, nor acknowledge her single act. If then, a naval force shall be 
sent to blockade your rivers and harbors, what can your army of 
12,000 men do? How can you remove the shipj)ing of the Union? 
Of what avail then to call yourselves a foreign nation? That navy 

i?o give them that power expressly ; they have it by the law of nature. When two partic^ 
make a compact tliere results to each a power of compelling theotlierto execute it. Com- 
pulsion was never so easy as in our case, ivhere a single frigate uwuld soon levy on 
the commerce of any State, the deficiency of its contrihutiow<; nor more safe ihanin 
the handj of Congress, which has always shown that it would wait, as it ought to do, to tli»'- 
last extremities, before it would execute any of its powers, which are disagreable." — 
Thus Mr. Jefferson himself acknowledges the power even of the Conjederation to employ 
the nai^y, to enforce its requisitions. How then could he, and how can you doubt the 
right of the present Government to do the same? 

The act of 28th Feb. 1795, authorizes the employment of the militia to execute the 
Jaws of the Union — and the act of 3d March, 1807, the employment of the Navy and 
Army in a like case. 1 annex the last, and so much of the first as relates to the subject. 

"Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That whenever the laws of the United States 
shall be opposed, or the execution thereof obstructed, in any State, by combinations t»b- 
powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the pow- 
ers vested in the marshals by this act, it shall be lawful for the President of the United 
States, to call forth the militia of such State, or of any other State or States, as may be 
necessary to suppress such combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly e.xecuted; and 
the use of the militia so to be called forth may be continued, if necessary, until the ex- 
piration of thirty days after the commencement of the then next Session of Congre.*s. 

"Sec. 3. Provident a/ways, and be it further enacted. That whenever it ni;iy ba 
necessary, in the judgment of the President, to use the military force hereby directed tt»- 
be called forth, the President shall forthwith, by proclamation, command such insurgents 
to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abode, within a limited time." 

"Sec. 9. A7id be it further enacted. That the marshals of the several distrtcts, and 
their deputies, shall have the same powers in executing the laws of the United States as 
sheriffs and their deputies, irf the several States, have by law, in executing the laws of the 
respective States."— 3(i vol. L. U. S. (Folwell) p. 189. 191. 

"5e it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congres assembled. That in all cases of insurrection, or at 
atruction to the laws, cither of the United Stales, or of any individual State or Terntory 
where it is lawful for the President of the United States to call forth the militia for the 
purpose of suppressing such insurrection, or of causing the laws to be duly executed, it 
shall be lawful for him to employ, for the same purposes, such part of the laud or naval 
force of the United States^ as shall be judged necessary,^ having^ first ohscfVtA .nU the 
|)re-je(jut?ite« of llic Inw in that ve«pocJ^" — Bth to'. J^ ''-''• /?. p- SlU 



would no iiioi'c rospocL^our title to indojx'adeiiut, thaiilhey vvouk? 
a clearance ft-om your Governor, ifiiderthe sen! of the State. They 
would not discuss the question of State Sovereignty, with the meta 
physicians of the Scut]>Carolina school; but would obey the orders 
sf the President sword in hand; and execute the laws of the Union.. 
with the cannon and the boarding pike. Your sister States froiv 
Maine to Missouri, from the St, Lawrence to the Mexican Gulf, would 
approve, though they could not rejoice. The Union, if governed by 
firm, yet wise and moderate counsels, would utterly annihilate all 
your schemes of resistance to their authority; and constrain you in u 
twelve-month by the miser}- and ruin^ by the bankruptcy and dis- 
trust, that would blast your State, to repeal your unconstitutional or 
dinance and statutes. The Union needs not to strike a blow, or shot' 
a drop of blood, on land, 

Perhajis you will sa}', that blockade is a belligerent right and that 
it cannot be lawfuly used against you? But, according to your ©wn 
doctrine, you are only bound by a league. The General Govern- 
ment is Ike common age?if appointed to execute the Treaty, Con- 
they listen to one of the Principals, v/hen th^y know, that all t/ie 
rest utterly disavow and condemn his construction of his own powci 
and of their duty? If a State employs a power, which is revolu- 
tionary as to the Union, and of course belligerent in its character, 
the Union must possess and will exercise a cori'espondentrightof re 
taliation. Are you in the Union? Blockade is then a clear excrcis' 
of the power to collect the revenue, and to prevent smuggling. — - 
Are you out of the Union? Then it is the exercise of an undoubted 
power to compel the observance of a treaty, broken by yourselves. 
But Congress will not regard it as a belligerent measure, whatever 
you may say on the subject. They must consider it as nothing more 
than the ordinary case of the President, as Commander-in-chief of 
the Army and Navy of the Union, employing the latter in the dis- 
charge of his duty, to "take care that the laws be faithfuly executed."' 
But I entreat you to look at the subject, in another point of view? 
What prevents the removal of the Custom House to Fort Moultrie 
or Castle Pinckney, guarded by a fleet of armed vessels? You can- 
not question the right to do this. Nor can you doubt the authority 
to require a cash payment of the duties at the Fort; before any vessel 
should come to the city. You will deny the right to collect any duty 
after the Ordinance; but you must admit, that they have the exclu- 
sive right to appoint the place, the time and the mode for the pay- 
meat of duties. Now, you know that the Union never will acknow- 
ledge your right of interference: and as their object will be to ensure 
the collection by the simplest and safest process, without bloodshed, 
you may be assured, that they will not hesitate to adopt such a method, 
Wliat then could you do? Would the officers of the army and navy 
yield obedience to your writs of replevin? You know that they 
neither would nor could. If they were to put the question to your- 
selves, you would be obliged, for I know that you vali^a trut,h an4 



11 

candor, to aclcnowledgc, that thoy ouglit not.* They would irofH 
your Sheriff as a Gentleman; but they would refer him to the Col- 
lector for a permit. What then would you do? Would you be the 
■aggressor and attack the Forts and shipping? If you did, could vou 
hope to succeed? What would your 13,000 men avail against fortifi- 
ed places, covered by the cannon of twenty vessels? VV'hether you 
did or not, would not this be a clear case of "levying war against 
Ihe United States," and is not that the Constitutionar definition of 
treason against the Union? You know that all the dcijartments of 
the National Government, must so regard it: and however distant 
the day, the assailants would be brought to justice. You cannot 
doubt, that your commission wo\ild not protect ihe Governor himself, 
in a Court of the Union (in whirh only the trial could be had), sit- 
ing under th.e Constitution and Laws of the Union. They could not 
acknov.-ledge the right of South-Carolina to make war against the 
Union: that is, to authorize any one under her commission, to com- 
mit treason against the Union. Tiiis is suieJy so plain, that no one 
<?au doubt. But let us suppose, that you could succeed in driving the 
troops from the fcrls, and the shipping from the harbor, by means of 
commanding positions for land batteries. Arc you not still brought 
back to the question of bloclvade; or, if you please, to much the 
same question in a different shape: And arc yoii not then under the 
•disadvantage of having driven the U. States, by acts of war, to the 
necessity of establishing a Custom House on board of a frigate at the 
bar, with a dozen vessels to ensure the collection of the revenue? 
■Could you drive them away? You know it would be impossible. 
You may raise an army; but could you build and man a nav}', (even 
if you had the sailors,) adequate to the task of meeting and conquer- 
ing such a force as the Union could station there, a force if necessary, 
of four hundred guns? You must know that the hope of detaining 
•a fleet even of 200 guns, m-uch less of destroying the blockading 
force, would be chimerical. Add to this that the Union could afford 
to expend twenty dollars, where you could one. Is it not manifest, 
that with an army of 12,000 men and such a navy, you vvould soon 
be on the verge, if not in the pit of bankruptcy? No one butjour- 
•selves could doubt, and I hardly think, if you will take the trouble 
to calculate, that you can doubt. 

But again, do you believe that any vessel of a foreign countr}' 
would venture to cross the bar, without having called at the floating 
Custom House, and paid the duty? Certainly you cannot believe it; 
because you know that forfeiture would be the result. Would any 
vessel of a sister State be willing to take the risk? I know that you 
must acknowledge she would not. Is not then your trade annihila- 
ted by this simple process; and by the time you had built a navy and 

*Yet the Ordinance as to these very officers, (not appointed by or responsible to the 
State, but created by and accountable to a separate and different govcrnnietit,) attempts 
"^vo bind them to obey the ordinance, when the Convention well knew that liiose officers 
could not dare to do so. This I apprehend is the first instance, in which one governnieiu 
lias attempted to bind the officers of another to obey lhe/r.«t,m direct niul imli^nhlt 
violation of their duty to the second. 



12 

disciplined an army, your credit would liave perished, and your arniv* 
and navy be unpaid? Your Governor has recommended a clearance 
frorn the Executive under the seal of the State. I cannot do so little 
justice to his good sense and his knowledge of public business, as not 
to believe, that he knows it would be of no more avail, with the navy 
of the Union, than your replevin writs: and as to foreign ports, the}*- 
would pay no more attention to such a paper, than to the certificate 
of any other respectable man. 

Whatever you may think of your sovereignty, recollect that for- 
eign nations know nothing of you. To them, Under the Laws of 
Nations, and your leaders all know it better than I do, South-Carolina 
could no more be noticed, by foreign governments, than America 
could notice Wales or Scotland, Flanders or A^enice. You have 
told the world, by all your public acts, that South-Carolina is not a 
Nation; that as to all the rest of the world, she is but a district* of 
one great Nation. You have said to the world, neither know, nor 
notice me; until the Government of this Union shall acknowledge 
me, hrj a like public act, both sovereign and independent . Are 
you offended at my freedom of speech? You know that I speak 
nothing but the plain, naked truth; when I tell you, that the Nations 
of the Earth can no more notice you, than the Government of a sis- 
ter State could notice the District of Colleton or Abbeville. For- 
eign Powers know and can know nothing of our country, but through 
its government: and who knows so little of histor}', and of Public 
Law, as not to acknowledge, that tlie People and Govcrnnient of 
South-Carolina have neither name nor place, in the record of in- 
ternational rights and dutiesA Asa Nation, if you ever were one, 
you are dead to all the world. lie not deceived. The dry bones 
of the perishcil Confederation possess no talisman power to give 
you life. The World may be called to gaze on the blockade of your 
coast; on the alternate execution of Traitors to the State, and Trai- 
tors to the Union; on the battlefield of brothers, and the conflagration 

* Chs. Pinckney in his Observations on the plan of Government which he submitted to 
th^ Convention, says, p. 12, "Tlie States should retain nothing more than mere local le- 
gislation, which as Districts of a General Government, they can exercise," &c. 

t "It is only in our united character, that we arc known as an empire, that our inde- 
j)endence>\s acknowledged, that our power can he regarded, or our credit supported 
abroad." — Washington's Lett. 8th June, 1783, to the Governors of the States. — 5 
Marsh. Wash. p. 48. 

"The People continued," after the Revolution, "to consider themselves in a national 
point of view as one People, and they continued without interruption, to manage their 
Au?(o?ia/ concerns accordingly." — By Ch. J. Jay, 2. Dallas, 470. 

Patrick Henry asked in a public speech at the Hustings, in 1798, "whether the county 
of Charlotte would have any authority to dispute an obedience to the Laws of Vir- 
ginia; and he pronounced Virginia to be to the Union, tvhat the county of Char- 
lotte was to her." — Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry, p. 394. 

"The Act of Independence," says Dr. David Ramsay, "did not hold out to the world 
thirteen Sovereign States; bnt a common Sovereignty of the whole, in their united ca- 
-pacity." — 2d vol. Ramsay's U. S. jj. 174, 5. 

We are fallen upon evil times, indeed, when the names and the authority of Washing- 
ton and Jay, of Patrick Hemy and David Ramsay, are despised and rejected by Carolina. 
But whatever she may think and insist on, the Union and the world will prefer the senti- 
ments of such patriot statesmen, to those of ^1 the politicians of the Carolina school oj" 
our day. 



ol your towns; n^T To that would it will v.y. the nisruiiv o^• 

\ UEBELLIOUS PuOVINCE, >;OT OF AN INDEPEXDKNT INatION. 

Thus have I endeavored to set hcforc you laitlifuly ami Itarlesslv. 
what the Nation can do, what the Nation nia}- be exj)cctcd to do!' 

But, I beseech you, mistake me not. I approve no such course. 
Had I the power and the right to bind the Union, 1 would have them 
say to Carolina, *'We have resolved to take away every possibilit\ 
that a drop of blood may be shed, in a contest between yourselves anc! 
the Union. AVe shall therefore remove every soldier from the State, 
and abandon the fortifications in your harbor. In your safe-keeping, 
for we at least will trust your faith and honor, are all our munition?^ 
of war. On this station, will be kept as usual only the customarv 
naval force, and even that shall be removed, if you request it. Ue- 
tween us there shall be no other law but that of peace, and reason. 
We will not, in any event, employ the navy, much less the army, 
or even the militia of your sister States against you. Let the Na- 
tion lose millions of revenue, rather than a drop of your blood 
shoidd ho she«l, in its collection. We cannot yield our opinion 
to yours; for a vast majority of the people and of your sister States 
approve ours and condemn yours; but let the Union, perish be- 
fore its cement shall be the blood of brot/iers. We shall go on- 
ward, in what appears to us the path of duty to the Union, and 
even to yourselves. But if yon interfere, we shall not resort to 
force. Our instructions to our oflicers will be, in such a case, to 
employ none against your authority. If you continue in the U- 
nion, we are willing to trust to your good sense, and your justice, 
lor indemnity. If you continue not, we are willing to bear the 
loss, rather than use violence to prevent it. Cost what it may, wc 
never ivill employ against brothers the weapons of an enemy. 
We give you a year to reflect. We beseech you to do it, in calmness 
and moderation, in the si)irit of peace and love. We conjure you 
to do it, by all that is holy in liberty, commanding in duty, and 
precious in the recollections of our common history." Attlieenri 
of that year, I would have the Union ask you to meet in Convention. 
To that assembly I would have them send a deputation of the wise 

'' Tliere is one thing more, which the General Government may ilo, in order to settle 
?he question, which Carolina raises and insists on, as to tlie mode and measure of redress; 
and that is to submit to the amendatory tribunal of State Legislatures or State Conventions 
a tZec/«ra^o?-!/ amendment, on the subject of Nullification or the State Veto, which, as the 
11th amendment expounded the 2d Section of the 3d Art. should expound the 9th nncl 
lOth amendments, and without acknowledging (for Congress could not acknowledge 
the right of a State to nullify and arrest an act of Congress) should declare, as the sense 
of the Amendatory Tribunal, that no State could Constitutionaly exercise such a right, 
under the said amendmenOi, or under any other part of the compact of Union. Ihat 
such would be the judgment of more than three-fourths of the Tribunal of States cannot 
be doubted: and as Carolina claims it as a reserved right under the Constitution, she 
would be satisfied, in such an event, to abandon the ground. May pacific counsels pre- 
vail, and such an amendment be proposed! lam aware it has been said, that such a 
declaration would not be compatible with the true character of an amendment. I have 
held the same opinion myself: and I still think, that except in so extraordinary a case as 
the present, the objection is valid; but in such a case as tljr?, I would depart Irom the 
"^onnnon rule for peac«-sake. 



14 

a^d veiifrablf men of a former age, one fVom each of the othir 
'^Itttcs in the Union. These should conie to you, in the garments of 
• nourning, and with the deep and solemn feeling of the Priests and 
Pontitfr-i, whom the RoniDiit; sent to dcjirtscate the wrath of Coriola- 
iiUE. 1 would have them address your delegates in that spirit, which 
hreathed the jjathetic sentiment, "Daughters of Jerusalem weep not 
for me, hut xveep for yourselves and your children." I would have 
them ask, are you prepareil to yield your cjjinion to that of all your 
Sisters, If you replied that you wqijc not — I would have them pro- 
nounce, in the suhlime and affecting language of freemen and broth- 
ers, your divorce from the marriage bond of the Union. 

Then, had I aiilhority (o speak for the sister States, and the Na- 
tional Government, I would have their delegates say to Carolina, in 
grief not in anger, "Depart in peace. Never sli;dl American blood 
be shed by us, in civil contest. You have shown, that you know not 
the character of the Union: that you bear to it no love: that you 
•estimate its value; not by the precious privileges and glorious associa- 
tions, which dignify and adorn it; but by the ledger and the price- 
current. You have shown by your Ordinance, that you understand 
not, or count as nothing, the cardiual principles of American ft-eedom: 
that you can violate "deliberately, palpably and dangerously," your 
own and the Constitution of the Union: that you can set at naught 
tlic ancient landmarks of legislative power, and the independence 
of the judiciary, the sanctity of contracts, and the purity of the trial 
by jur}'. You have shown, that in the name of Ljberty, you can 
smite and dishonor her: that with her praise on your lips, you have 
put her to shame by your deeds: that you have ceased to be 
AN American Republic. Depart then in peace: with the blessings 
und the grief, not the curses and wrath of }-our sisters. Depart until 
j^ou shall again become worthy of the society of free States, of a 
place in the Sisterhood of American Republics." 

Such would be the sentiments which 1 should utter, had I power to 
:ipeak for the rest of- the Anicrican family. But, it is among rulers, 
as among individuals. Few have the wisdom to acknowledge or the 
courage to act on the noble and lovely principles of Christian Peace. 
The battle ship and the tented field, the sword and the cannon, the 
sciljncc and the stratagems of war, are at once the symbols of power, 
and the proofs of courage, the logic of Statesmen and the eloquence of 
Patriots. The very dead, who lie in their gory beds at Lexington 
and Bunker, at King's Mountain and Eutaw, the victims of foreign 
bayonets, arc invoked to bless fratricide: and "the chivalry of the 
South," becomes a watchword, to kindle the pride and inflame the 
passions of brother against brother. And is it to the sordid elements 
of pride and passion, of selfishness, jealousy and prejudice, that the 
American Statesman is willing to appeal? Can he consent to make 
the sword the arbiter, in any event, under any circumstances, between 
iJie States themselves, or between one of them and the Union? God 
forbid that a drop of blood should ever be shed in such a cause. I 
would have the Union say to South Carolina, ''If your people pre- 



15 

Icr fl separate existence, let tlicm liavc it: if they would ratiier cnjur 
foreign dependence on natunil enemies, (for ihnt is inevitable) than 
a brotherly dependence on their own kindred, be it so: if they pre- 
fer to the republican government of the Union, the anti-republican 
Ordinance of their Convention, let them be gratified." But who 
believes, that the Union will act thus? With the same elemental 
of pride and passion, of selfishness, jealousy and prejudice, whicli 
inflame you, can you doubt that tht' National Rulers, elevated i)y tlic 
consciousness of superior power, will take up the gauntlet, which 
you have cast at their feel? 

For myself, I trust, that I hold v/ith an inflexible conviction the 
sentiment, that the character of the JFarrior, in any point of vieio is 
UNCHRISTIAN, (uid ill CIVIL conlcst, isahsohitel)/ and iincJuingeahlij 
ANTI-REPUBLICAN. Abov^c all, lo OUT American Republics, so in- 
comparably superior in their elements and structure, to all other gov- 
ernments, ancient or modern, I hold the appeal to arms, on dis^uteJ 
questions of any kind, to be ingratitude to Heaven, treachery to the 
cause of regulated government, and actual hostility to the highest iu- 
terests of Freedom. It is the duty of the American family, and their 
safety and happiness demand it, that the Aicord never sfuntld or 
drawn among themseioes. Let them resolve inflexibl}-, that llii.-. 
shall be the great law of their social compact: that the law of vio- 
lence and blood shall be forever blotted out from the tables of their 
Law: and the Golden Rule of love, the lest of a Cliristian People., 
the highest fountain of peace and happiness, the higliest security of 
Freedom herself, the- true glory of confederated republics, shall be 
written there in its stead. All acknowledge the truth, and admire 
the beauty of these sentiments. And yet, of that all, how few have 
the courage and the wisdom, with a calm and single-hearted, reso- 
luteness of purpose, to take /he only Christian, the only liepiiblic- 
an ground, the sword shall never be drawn by brother against broth- 
er, or by brothers against the Family Government of brothers!- — 
Who is so blind as not to see, that the great danger of the American 
States lies in the Laiv of Violence? Who does not know, that the 
^word among Freemen, is the assassin's dagger to liiberty? The 
blood of martyrdom shed on the scaffold, is ^he very dew of Heaven 
to perishing liberty; but the blood of civil contest, in a republic, is 
fo her as consuming fire from the bottomless pit. What but Uie pros- 
pect, what but the preparation for an appeal to the Law of Violence, 
.eould have led your Convention to invade the State and National 
Constitutions so palpably and deliberately: and to substitute the 
treacherous beacons of tyrany, for the eternal landmarks of freedom? 
These infi'actions are the more dangerous and hostile to freedom; be- 
cause they are a highway for military power. Already, in the vista 
may you behold its standard unfurled. Its battle shout is wafted in 
no faint murmur to your ear, and Liberty stands aghast at the scene. 
It is a vision of brothers murdered by brothers, of the widow and tl>€ 
yrphan, mourning over fathers and sons, kindred and friends, slain by 
e»ch other. Shall it be but a vision? It muTft be such, if vog wUl ii- 



io 

But if you stand by, and sjjcak not the tvill of a free, enlightened, 
Ciiristian, peaceful people, it will be your own history, tlie very next 
year. 

For myself, I j^rotcst in the name of the Religion of Peace; in 
the name of our sister Republics: in the name of Liberty throughout 
the world; in the name of Washington, Franklin and Jay, against 
this fratricidal violence, against the Law" op the Sword. I adjure 
you by the hopes of the noble army of martyrs, on the scafibid of 
iyrany -and at the stake of persecution, to banish forever the law of 
the sword. I adjure you b}' the bitter repentance in the eternal vvorld, 
of the tens of thousands, who have perished in the battle-shock of 
civil wars, to banish it forever. I adjure you by Ihe countless spir- 
its of her children, whether of the darkest or the brightest ages of 
Liberty, to banish it forever, I adjure you in the name of the God 
of our Fathers, who hath given you the noblest inheritance, the most 
glorious prospects, ever conferred on his children, to rakish fou- 
EVER THE Law of Violence, the Law of the Sword. 

J at least have resolved, and may God give me strenglh to abide 
by that holy purpose, that come what may, I shall never bear arms 
in a civil contest. Property, personal liberty, life itself, are my 
country's. They are in her power. I have loved: I have honored: 
I have served her. Let her make me a paujjer; let her cast me 
down into the dungeon of her wrath; let lier drag me on the traitor's 
hurdle to the scaffold of her avenging justice; but never can she blot 
out from my soul a brother's love; never shall she brand that soui 
with a brother's blood, 

Respcctfuly, 

Your fellow-citizen, 
THOMAS S. GRIMKpi 



P. S. — The whole replevin system, apparently contrived so shil- 
fuly and efficiently at Columbia, is defeated at once by making the 
commanding officer at Fort Moultrie the .receiver of duties, by re- 
quiring them to be paid in specie — and shipping it off, (whenever a 
sufficient amount is collectcfh by a national vessel to anotlior port. 








W^ 



m^^. / 



f 



\ f 







